Additional Residential Lots in Existing Neighbourhoods - What We Heard - July 31, 2017 Background This project investigates the development potential of 13 areas across the City of Whitehorse. Parcels are in Hidden Valley (1), Porter Creek (1), Arkell (1), Logan (1), Granger (1), Whitehorse Copper (4), Mary Lake (3), and Cowley Creek (1). The parcels being looked at could house a variety of different housing types and potentially several individual lots. Background technical data was also collected. The first phase of public consultation was intended to collect input on the potential development areas to determine which made sense and what type of development could potentially take place. Advertising was done through various mediums, local signage, and letters to nearby property owners. An online survey was also conducted to collect initial public input on the potential development locations. The survey was available from May 24-June 18, 2017. A total of 462 surveys were completed for the following areas: Couch Road (65 surveys) Wann Road (58 surveys) Sandpiper Drive (27 surveys) Magpie Road (48 surveys) Wilson Drive (39 surveys) Whitehorse Copper (85 surveys) Mary Lake (89 surveys) Salmon Trail (51 surveys) Over 50 emails and letters were also received with comments on this project. Comments have been compiled and condensed into Country Residential and Urban areas. In most cases, this document lists general themes as opposed to individual comments. Please te that any comments received have been reviewed and will be included in the decision making process. The information has been presented with general comments first, with more detailed comments for each neighbourhood. Index General Comments on this Project Pg 2 Country Residential Areas Pg 2 General Survey Responses Pg 2 Additional Comments Pg 3 Hidden Valley Potential Development Area Pg 4 Whitehorse Copper Potential Development Areas Pg 4 Mary Lake Potential Development Areas Pg 5 Cowley Creek Potential Development Area Pg 6 Urban Residential Areas Pg 6 General Survey Responses Pg 6 Additional Comments Pg 7 Wann Road Potential Development Site Pg 7 Magpie Road Potential Development Site Pg 8 Sandpiper Drive Potential Development Site Pg 8 Wilson Drive Potential Development Site Pg 9 1
General Comments on this project Consultation process Insufficient consultation process small tification radius, time period too short, bad time of year (end of school beginning of summer), t eugh detail information available Moving too quickly- feels like decision has already been made. Would have liked to have been consulted earlier on about the project more generally. Survey did t provide a means of elaborating concerns Not everyone has a computer, t a good consultation technique Entire consultation process was t laid out clearly from the beginning (e.g. what happens after the survey? ) Was t brought up at townhall/april Round Table Inaccurate and misleading information released by the media and City There should be a public consultation event before a decision is made General support for infill Don t always hear from the silent majority Lots of people could benefit from new lots Infill is an important way to address rising housing costs Infill is a responsible use of limited space and resources Infill reduces impacts on the environment from sprawl and greenfield development Good that existing residents can influence the design considerations of infill Taxes, quality of life, property values, and an expectation of greenspace People buy their homes based on zoning, shouldn t be allowed to change it Property values might go down when you remove greenspace Construction is bothersome Suggestions for additional/alternative infill and development locations Riverdale should be included (Site on Liard Road) Consider Long Lake area Why t FN land near Hidden Valley? Why t City owned land on the other side of MacPherson? Develop outside of the City (more breathing room and green space) Focus development in urban areas Country Residential Areas General survey response comments: What is your favourite thing about the neighbourhood you live in? Greenspace and trails Local recreation opportunities (walking, hiking, biking, skiing, etc) Wildlife/bird habitat and viewing Natural wilderness and viewscapes Lot size and privacy from neighbours/quiet Low traffic volumes Rural setting but still close to town 2
How have you used the Walking, skiing, running, dog walking, horseback riding, biking, swshoeing Play area for children Wildlife/bird viewing Access to surrounding greenspace and trail system, including Copper Haul Road/Trans Canada Trail Horseback riding, ATVing, and swmobiling Berry and mushroom picking Access to other areas of the neighbourhood Photography be considered, such as setbacks, buffers, trail corridors, etc? Existing trails must be maintained Do t develop - develop a new subdivision instead of adding lots to existing neighbourhoods Similar lot size and development regulations as the rest of the neighbourhood Firesmart to reduce fire risk Well and septic systems and vulnerable with additional development Large front yard setbacks to maintain character of neighbourhood Ensure adequate site lines for driveways to reduce traffic impacts retirement homes should be considered Additional Comments: Already losing access to greenspace nearby due to mining claims Need an environmental assessment Designations should t be subject to change - they were designated for a reason Reduced water flows to wells and contamination from added septic systems Taxes, property values, distance from neighbours, and an expectation of greenspace when properties purchased Concern that infill will promote more development in the future by setting a precedent Property values may go down because of increased density and reduced greenspace Concern that more traffic could lead to more accidents Need better coordination between trail planning/wolf Creek Park planning and the infill planning policy Impact of new fences on wildlife movement Potential increase in human-wildlife conflicts in the area if these lots are developed wildlife will be killed for simply following a trail they have walked since time began Infill does t fit with OCP or Sustainability plan. Does t promote compact development. Will t help affordable housing and poverty reduction or homelessness Potential for more dogs and livestock in neighbourhood 3
Hidden Valley Potential Development Site Survey Response Highlights: If this site is developed, what housing is best? 77% 23% Hidden Valley 8% 12% 20% 60% 46% 8% 46% be considered, such as setbacks, buffers, trail corridors, etc? This is competing with private land owner interests Develop site as co-op housing for low income family that cant afford homes. Government could still own the land Consultation process assumes development will occur Review potential traffic issues at intersection of Couch Road and Alaska Highway Limit the number of animals (pigs, chickens, goats, etc) allowed on properties Allow hobby agriculture with pigs, chickens, goats, etc Require natural landscaping Will create ambient light that will reduce visibility of the Aurora Borealis and affect business at Hidden Valley Bed and Breakfast Will compete with a proposed subdivision plan submitted by EVEM Ltd. Trail access for Hidden Valley School Whitehorse Copper Potential Development Sites 47% 53% Whitehorse Copper 2% 3% 31% 25% 39% Townhouse 4
13% 53% 34% Buffers from existing properties Maintain existing access to meadow areas Re-evaluate the capacity of Golden Horn Elementary Allow for garden suites but subdivision Undertake applicable geotechnical and hydrogeological investigation Map bird nesting sites and avoid May-Aug 200-300 m buffer for access trails Create a new walking trail along Moraine Drive No mobile homes Additional Comments: Development area is a wetland (one lot on Talus Drive is on a wetland) Ravens nesting on one of the sites (lot on Talus Drive that is a wetland) Mary Lake Potential Development Sites 51% 49% Mary Lake 8% 12% 20% 60% 9% 37% 54% Trail planning and Wolf Creek Park planning should be finished before any development occurs Garbage and recycling pick-up should be implemented Maintain the access to the lake across the 6 ha parcel Protect the historic Carcross Trail in the area Ensure appropriate site lines for all driveway access points Retain trees on each development parcel Planning staff did t attend neighbourhood meeting about proposed development Flooding, drainage and topography (lot across from 71 Fireweed specifically) Fireweed Drive condition and summer and winter maintenance. Few corridors left for wildlife in south Whitehorse zone Inform potential buyers that they may pay a premium for fire insurance due to distance The 6 ha site in Mary Lake is the main n-motorized access to the lake 5
Cowley Creek Potential Development Site 57% 43% Cowley Creek 2% 2% 31% 22% 43% 12% 41% 47% Create buffers to maintain privacy Maintain existing trails and access to meadow area No mobile homes, multiple family development, or group homes Implement traffic calming measures for Salmon Trail Sites t ideal for building as they are marshy, swampy Lots are very close to the creek Moose calve and spend the winter Southern Lakes caribou herd migration area Urban Residential Areas General survey response comments: What is your favourite thing about the neighbourhood you live in? Established quiet neighbourhood, mature trees, low density, and low traffic Close proximity to greenspace and recreation areas, schools, bus stops Adequate lot size and yards for parking and storage Few rentals/multiple housing so owners take care of properties Safe areas for kids to play, t much crime proposed development site? Access bus stop, adjacent streets, mailboxes, school, other parts of the neighbourhood Walking, dog walking, running, biking Wildlife/bird/nature viewing Play area for children Connection to surrounding trail system Picking berries/mushrooms 6
be considered, such as setbacks, buffers, trail corridors, etc? Similar lot size and development regulations as the rest of the neighbourhood Existing trail connections must be maintained Ensure adequate site lines for driveways to reduce traffic impacts Do t develop - develop a new subdivision instead of adding lots to existing neighbourhoods Additional Comments: Don t cut down trees, Leave a green corridor to buffer Multi-family/higher density does t fit with the style of the existing neighbourhood The area is animal habitat (birds, butterflies, bees, squirrels, etc) Wann Road Potential Development Site 41% 59% Porter Creek 17% 21% 17% 24% 21% 8% 71% 21% Large setbacks from existing properties Homeowners should have opportunity to purchase land adjacent to their lot lines Include a trail corridor Multiple housing rentals that could accommodate several families close to schools and amenities It seems like a waste of land to leave it vacant Don t develop in existing neighbourhoods Entrance to the lot might be difficult - it s shaped like a bottle neck and a powerline ROW runs through it Area may be bedrock and unsuitable for development Property owners have previously objected to development at this site 7
Magpie Road Potential Development Site 29% 71% Logan 2% 13% 6% 4% 44% 31% duplex townhouse proposed devleopment area? 38% 4% 58% Do t allow garden suites, townhouses, multiple family, or commercial development Review traffic impacts as this area is between two intersections on a busy bus route Ensure sufficient off-street parking Ensure site line at intersection with Finch is t impacted Build a park or playground instead of housing Three lots would be acceptable Don t develop this site Five single family lots is an acceptable use of the land Property is an access point/walking path for connecting to transit for Bluejay/Finch Consider a buffer on the side adjacent to Falcon Drive. Boulevard is used as school bus stop site for several routes and serves as City Transit stop. Access from Falcon should be restricted and the buffer strip would ensure this and protect the boulevard area. Buffer would contain electrical infrastructure at the corner of Falcon and Finch and the neighbourhood sign. The buffer would allow improved landscaping around sign to enhance neighbourhood gateway. Sandpiper Drive Potential Development Site 7% 67% 33% Arkell 11% 26% 45% 11% 8
22% 56% 22% Develop single family housing with suites Keep the lot prices low eugh so that the average income family can afford to build a house for less than $450k. Develop smaller conventional houses (t mobile homes) to provide more variety of housing types. Develop a playground as originally intended Allow only mobile homes similar to existing development Do t allow multiple family housing Do t develop Greenspace adds value to the neighbourhood as there is very little mature forest nearby There are already too many houses in this neighbourhood It makes sense to develop in established neighborhoods if possible. Wilson Drive Potential Development Site 46% 54% Granger 5% 18% 5% 18% 31% 23% Townhouse proposed development site? 13% 54% 33% Do t impact location of fire hydrant as it has an effect on homeowners insurance Ensure eugh on-site parking as this lot is on a corner and street parking will cause traffic issues Don t develop this site Only allow single family and duplex housing Develop community greenhouse/garden/ playground area Do t allow secondary suites Allow for triplex development There is only one public garbage can in the whole area. Keep the lot prices affordable This is a fairly busy corner with the traffic from Ha Place and Ha Crescent, plus mail kiosk and school bus stop. Trail connectivity can be maintained through area west on Wilson 9